Sunday, June 19, 2011

Pakistan, America, Cultural Sensitivity, and Giving Terrorists a Break

Pakistan's national leadership - or folks in that outfit - may be in an awkward situation. What passes for a national government in Pakistan apparently controls at least most of the capital city, and parts of some others - except, apparently, for places like the neighborhood where Osama bin Laden had an estate-size semi-fortified compound that nobody noticed.(May 4, 2011)

Nobody, that is, except for some folks who are now arrested (or not) by the alleged government of Pakistan. (June 15, 2011) And that's another topic.

Apparently, when it comes to places outside Islamabad and a few other parts of the country, Pakistan's national government has to tell tribal leaders when the national military is going to do something.

Like attack terrorists who are guests of the tribal leaders.

States' Rights, Pakistani Style?

In a way, I can see why coordinating with tribal leaders could be a good idea. Maybe Pakistan is organized sort of like the 13 colonies were, under the Articles of Confederation, after we booted George III's agents out: before we scrapped the Articles, and hammered out the Constitution that we've been tweaking ever since.

That said, Pakistan's nominal national government doesn't seem like a particularly reliable outfit. Individuals working for the government may realize that America and other western powers aren't as hard on Pakistanis as the Taliban - but the government as a whole seems to be inept. At best.

'Trust - But Verify'

After two attacks on terrorist installations found recently-evacuated sites, American officials thought they'd see what happened when they shared intelligence with Pakistani officials, a third time, and a fourth:
"...In the tradition of 'trust but verify,' the Americans carefully monitored the area with satellite and unmanned drones, to see what would happen, after sharing the information a third and fourth time, the officials said.

"In each case, they watched the militants depart within 24 hours, taking any weapons or bomb-making materials with them, just as militants had done the first two times. Only then, did they watch the Pakistani military visit each site, when the terror suspects and their wares were long gone, the officials said....
(Associated Press, via FoxNews.com)
I've put a longer excerpt from that article at the end of this post.1

No wonder Pakistani officials were upset, offended, insulted, and generally displeased when American officials said that somebody had talked.

Of course somebody had talked: those Americans were going to attack guests of tribal leaders. Guests who might start killing Pakistanis, again, the next time they were in a snit: but guests.

As American professors were so fond of pointing out: Ugly Americans have absolutely no respect for the cultural values of others. And that's another topic. Topics.

Related posts:In the news:
1Excerpt from yesterday's news:
"U.S. officials say Pakistan has apparently tipped off militants at two more bomb-building factories in its tribal areas, giving the terror suspects time to flee, after U.S. intelligence shared the locations with the Pakistani government.

"U.S. officials believe Pakistan's insistence on seeking local tribal elders' permission before raiding the areas may have most directly contributed to the militants' flight. U.S. officials have pushed for Pakistan to keep the location of such targets secret prior to the operations, but the Pakistanis say their troops cannot enter the lawless regions without giving the locals notice.

"The U.S. officials explained Saturday how they first offered the location of the third, and then the fourth site, in order to give Pakistan another chance to prove it could be trusted to go after the militants.

"In the tradition of 'trust but verify,' the Americans carefully monitored the area with satellite and unmanned drones, to see what would happen, after sharing the information a third and fourth time, the officials said.

"In each case, they watched the militants depart within 24 hours, taking any weapons or bomb-making materials with them, just as militants had done the first two times. Only then, did they watch the Pakistani military visit each site, when the terror suspects and their wares were long gone, the officials said....

"...The [Pakistani] official admitted that in each raid, however, the Pakistani security services notified the local elders who hold sway in the tribal regions. The official said they would investigate U.S. charges that the militants had been tipped off.

"Two U.S. officials said they were asking the Pakistanis to withhold such sensitive information from the elders, and even their lower ranks, to prove they could be trusted to keep a secret, and go after U.S. enemies....

"...U.S. officials have also accused Pakistan of holding up to five Pakistani nationals accused of helping the CIA spy on the Abbottabad compound in advance of the bin Laden raid...."
(Associated Press, via FoxNews.com)
Posted by at 3 comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Wednesday, June 15, 2011

CIA Informants Snatched in Pakistan - My Take

Pakistan's arrested CIA informants - folks who helped the CIA find Osama bin Laden. Who had been living in a slightly-fortified compound in a medium-size city about 31 miles from Islamabad.

I don't know - and don't have enough information to guess - whether the people who were arrested really were arrested: or whether the whole thing is some kind of plot. My guess is that they really were snatched, but maybe someone in Pakistan's leadership wants someone else to look bad. Or maybe a clerk didn't get treated the way he likes, and made up the story to get even. I doubt that - but it's possible.

Brigadier General Syed Azmat Ali says that a major wasn't arrested.1 Maybe the major isn't a major any more - and so the Brigadier General's statement, "we ... deny that any such or any army officer..." is true. Now.

Or maybe the Brigadier General wants to live to see next year - or has family he's protecting.

From what I understand, the ISI is - really - what never-left-the-'60s liberals think the CIA is like. (December 27, 2008)

For the moment, I'm assuming that at least five people who helped the CIA find bin Laden are being held by the ISI. Or somebody with the muscle to pull a job like that, and have a Brigadier General provide an alibi.

What I don't know - and don't have enough information to guess - is whether the folks who've been snatched were targeted because they finked on bin Laden, or because they told the CIA instead of the 'right people' in Pakistan.

If this makes it seem like I don't have the highest regard for the folks who run various parts of Pakistan - you're perceptive. In my opinion, Pakistan is in better shape than Somalia: but it's just barely a "nation." More like a territory run by a feuding collection of tribal leaders, terrorists, warlords, and the occasional allegedly-elected official.

In the news:
"PAKISTAN'S ISI spy agency has arrested at least five CIA informants who helped lead US commandos to Osama bin Laden's Pakistan compound, highlighting the deepening fractures in the alliance.

"The five Pakistani informants, including an army major believed to have noted down the number plates of all vehicles that visited the Abbottabad compound, had been taken into custody, US officials confirmed to The New York Times yesterday.

"Last week, Pakistani army chief Ashfaq Parvaz Kayani announced he was ending all US military counter-insurgency training of his country's soldiers and imposing new restrictions on intelligence sharing between the nations...."
(The Australian)
"Pakistan's intelligence service has arrested the owner of a safe house rented to the CIA to observe Usama bin Laden's compound before the U.S. raid that killed the Al Qaeda leader, as well as a 'handful' of other Pakistanis, a U.S. official said late Tuesday.

"In Pakistan, a Western official confirmed a New York Times report that five of the Pakistani informants who fed information to the CIA before the May 2 bin Laden raid were arrested by Pakistan's top military spy agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence agency, known as ISI.

"The officials spoke to The Associated Press on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive intelligence matters...."
(Associated Press, via FoxNews.com)
Related posts:
In the news:
1 From VOA News:
"A report in Wednesday's New York Times quotes unnamed U.S. intelligence officials as saying Pakistan has arrested five people, including a Pakistani military official, accused of passing information to the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency prior to last month's U.S. raid in the Pakistani garrison town of Abbottabad that resulted in the death of Osama bin Laden. The Times report exposes the growing friction between the U.S. and Pakistan in the wake of that operation.

"The New York Times article cites unnamed sources in the American intelligence community who claim that the five detainees include a Pakistani army major who copied the license plate numbers of cars visiting Bin Laden's compound in Abbottabad in the weeks leading up to the May 2 U.S. raid.

"Pakistani military spokesman Brigadier General Syed Azmat Ali emphasized that no Pakistani military personnel have been detained in relation to the Abbottabad raid.

" 'We categorically deny that any such or any army officer was arrested in connection with this,' said Azmat Ali...."
(VOA News)
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Tuesday, June 14, 2011

What Sony, Nintendo, and Congress, have In Common

Correction (June 15, 2011)
Editing this post, I moved the AP/FoxNews quote explaining the title to the footnote 1. That quote is now where it belongs, in the body of the post. Oops.
(a tip of the hat to Brigid)
Looks like the U.S. Senate's website was hacked. That's the bad news.

The good news is that it's the Senate's public site, and apparently nothing sensitive was lost or stolen.

Some not-so-good news is that part of the problem seems to be inside the Senate:
"...The vulnerability was traced to a part of the Senate site that is maintained by an individual Senate office, which Bradford did not name. Each senator and committee maintains its own presence on Senate.gov and may not adequately protect the site, she [the Senate's Deputy Sergeant-at-Arms Martina Bradford] said...."
(Associated Press, via FoxNews.com)
This hack attack isn't China's doing - a group of hackers called Lulz Security says they're responsible. I suppose they could be fronting for China - or the CIA - or shape-shifting, space-alien lizard men, but I don't think that's likely.

Lulz Security's stated motives are pretty clear, and part of a familiar pattern:
"...'We don't like the US government very much,' the website wrote atop the file. 'Their sites aren't very secure.

" 'In an attempt to help them fix their issues ... this is a small, just-for-kicks release of some internal data from Senate.gov,' the site added. 'Is this an act of war, gentlemen? Problem?'..."
(Associated Press, via FoxNews.com)
Lulz Security doesn't just hack into the U.S. government, apparently:
"...The group has claimed credit for hacking into the systems of Sony and Nintendo and for defacing the PBS website after the public television broadcaster aired a documentary seen as critical of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange...."
(Associated Press, via FoxNews.com)
I put more from that article at the end of this post.1

I'm no adoring fan of the United States Congress. On consideration, I'd rather live in America than anywhere else - and I think our form of government, on the whole, works adequately well. But I also wish that members of congress would display common sense more consistently. I've discussed hyperventilating rhetoric before - in and out of Congress. (June 11, 2011)

Other congressional deficiencies - I've been over that in another blog:That's partly about the Wiener debacle, so if you think Representative Wiener is the best thing that ever happened to New York state, you probably won't like the post.

Now, about the latest hack and getting a grip.

Briefly:
  • This hack is
    • Embarrassing
    • Not, apparently, a serious threat
    • A useful wake-up call
      • Maybe
  • One Senate office dropped the (security) ball
    • Spear phishing?
    • Something else?
  • Cyberwar?
    • Probably not
  • Alternatively-responsible?
    • Yes
      • In my opinion
  • Ideology isn't an excuse for bad behavior
    • In my opinion
I've written about that sort of thing before.

Related posts:In the news:
1 From yesterday's news:
"A band of computer hackers who pride themselves on attacking vulnerable networks for fun accessed a Senate server that supports the chamber's public website but did not breach other files, a Capitol Hill law enforcement official said Monday. The hackers said the release was a 'just for kicks' attempt to help the government 'fix their issues.'

" 'Although this intrusion is inconvenient, it does not compromise the security of the Senate's network, its members or staff,' Senate Deputy Sergeant-at-Arms Martina Bradford said in a statement.

"A hacking cooperative that goes by Lulz Security claimed that it had added a Senate file to its list of successful, high-profile intrusions at a time when governments and corporations are on high guard for cyber intrusions...."

"...'We don't like the US government very much,' the website wrote atop the file. "Their sites aren't very secure.

" 'In an attempt to help them fix their issues ... this is a small, just-for-kicks release of some internal data from Senate.gov,' the site added. 'Is this an act of war, gentlemen? Problem?'..."
(Associated Press, via FoxNews.com (June 13, 2011))
Posted by at 1 comment:
Labels: , , , ,

Sunday, June 12, 2011

Business-As-Usual in Bahrain: Poet Imprisoned

Ever wish people would stop criticizing the President?

Think 'there oughtta be a law' against saying bad things about America? Or Australia, or India, or whichever country you call "home?"

Some countries work that way:
"Bahrain tries ex-lawmakers, imprisons poet"
CNN (June 12, 2011)

"...Meanwhile, poet Ayat al-Qormozi, 20, was found guilty of assembling at Pearl Roundabout, the epicenter of anti-government demonstrations in the kingdom earlier this year. Additional charges included speaking out against Bahrain and the king.

"The Bahrain Youth Society for Human Rights said she read a poem criticizing government policy at the Roundabout.

"Mubarak, the government official, said Bahrain had freedom of speech, but that there were limits.

" 'Freedom of speech in this country has its boundaries and cannot touch on the leadership, and cannot call for the overthrow of the government,' he said.

"Her poem, he said, 'caused incitement and hatred to his majesty the king and to the prime minister' with lines such as 'we are people who kill humiliation' and 'assassinate misery.'..."
I think it's reasonable, in America, that calling for the overthrow of our government to be illegal.

That's what we have elections for - to swap out the current nitwits for new ones, who at least may do less damage.

Laws against criticizing the government? That makes revolution sound more reasonable. As I recall, that's part of why colonists got fed up with George III's administration, back when.

And that isn't, quite, another topic.

Related posts:
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Saturday, June 11, 2011

IMF Hacked, Again - or - 'This isn't Cyberwar: It Just Acts Like Cyberwar'?!

I really hope that the key people who may have clicked the wrong link, or opened the wrong attachment, are a trifle less clueless than Dilbert's manager:



Still, there have been a lot of hack attacks so far this year.

Big ones:
  • Sony
  • Lockheed Martin
  • Oak Ridge
  • L-3 Communications
  • Grumman
    (see June 1, 2011)
Now we hear that the IMF's network has been compromised.

Again.

I hope I don't seem overly-concerned: but it's hard for me to shake the impression that all is not well with corporate and government information networks. Sure: Hacking Sony's Playstation database isn't quite like the International Monitory Fund network leaking. I include Sony's cyber-security woes in that list, because ideally a company as savvy as Sony shouldn't have let that happen.

Something, I think, has gone wrong with too many major commercial and government networks this year.

So, do I think it's time to run in circles and scream like a demented cat? No: That does not appear to be a reasonable approach.

On the other hand, I very sincerely hope that the White House cyber security coordinator has some response in mind. Besides calling cyber war a "turbo metaphor:" one that doesn't quite fit the sort of espionage we've been seeing. I think he's got a point, by the way, about staying calm:Here's what got me started with this post:
"IMF hit by 'very major' cyber security attack"
US & Canada, BBC News (June 11, 2011)

"The International Monetary Fund (IMF) says it has been targeted by a sophisticated cyber attack.

"Officials at the fund gave few details but said the attack earlier this year had been 'a very major breach' of its systems, the New York Times reports.

"Cyber security officials said the hack was designed to install software to create a 'digital insider presence'.

"The IMF, which holds sensitive economic data about many countries, said its operations were fully functional.

"The cyber attack took place over several months, and happened before former IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn was arrested over sexual assault charges...."

"...A cyber security expert told Reuters the infiltration had been a targeted attack, which installed software designed to give a nation state a 'digital insider presence' at the IMF.

" 'The code was developed and released for this purpose,' said Tom Kellerman, who has worked for the Fund...."

'Epidemic' Sounds Dramatic

I think there are a whole lot of hack attacks happening - major ones - this year. I also am a little cautious when someone uses emotive terms like "epidemic."

Still, these anonymous "experts" may be right.
"Targeted cyber attacks an 'epidemic'"
Maggie Shiels, Technology, BBC News (June 2, 2011)

"The targeted attack used by hackers to compromise e-mail accounts of top US officials is reaching 'epidemic' proportions, say security experts.

"The scam, known as spear phishing, was used in a bid to get passwords of Gmail accounts so they could be monitored.

"Via a small number of customised messages it tries to trick people into visiting a web page that looks genuine so users type in login names.

"Such attacks are often aimed at top officials or chief executives.

"Such attacks are not new, say security professionals, but they are becoming more commonplace.

" 'What is happening more and more is the targeting of a couple of high value individuals with the one goal of acquiring valuable information and valuable data,' said Dan Kaminsky, chief scientist at security firm DKH...."

'This isn't War - It Just Acts Like War?!'

Or, famous last words?
"Cyber war threat exaggerated claims security expert"
Maggie Shiels, Technology, BBC News (February 16, 2011)

"The threat of cyber warfare is greatly exaggerated, according to a leading security expert.

"Bruce Schneier claims that emotive rhetoric around the term does not match the reality.

"He warned that using sensational phrases such as 'cyber armageddon' only inflames the situation.

"Mr Schneier, who is chief security officer for BT, is due to address the RSA security conference in San Francisco this week

"Speaking ahead of the event, he told BBC News that there was a power struggle going on, involving a 'battle of metaphors'.

"He suggested that the notion of a cyber war was based on several high-profile incidents from recent years.

"They include blackouts in Brazil in 1998, attacks by China on Google in 2009 and the Stuxnet virus that attacked Iran's nuclear facilities.

"He also pointed to the fallout from Wikileaks and the hacking of Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin's e-mail.

" 'What we are seeing is not cyber war but an increasing use of war-like tactics and that is what is confusing us...'..."

"...His point of view was backed by Howard Schmidt, cyber security co-ordinator for the White House.

" 'We really need to define this word because words do matter,' said Mr Schmidt.

" 'Cyber war is a turbo metaphor that does not address the issues we are looking at like cyber espionage, cyber crime, identity theft, credit card fraud...."
Okay: no turbo metaphors.

The IMF has been hacked. Again.

American defense contractors have been hacked. Several Times. This year. And the year isn't half-over yet.

Still, it could be worse.

Hey, the North American power grid is still working: right?

So, hey: how bad can it get? (June 1, 2011)

Like I said: Famous last words?

Related posts:
In the news:
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Friday, June 10, 2011

Chinese Fishing Boats, Vietnamese Live Fire Drill: Why I Care

Historically, China has been the home of a great civilization. For most of America's history, though, China was a place where leaders had trouble with their subjects, famines, and foreign occupation. Then Chairman Mao had a shot (literally, in some cases) at making China another 'workers paradise.'1

Mao and his successors were about as successful, in my opinion, as anybody else at making a system that looks good on paper work in the real world.

More recently, China's leaders have apparently decided that catching up with countries that use market-oriented economies is more important than ideological purity. That, I think, is good news. Particularly for folks living in China.

What doesn't seem to have changed so much is a parochial set of assumptions about China and foreigners.2 In my opinion.

Which brings me to something I read in the news this morning:

Vietnam, China, Fishing Boats, and Live Ammo

Chinese leaders are under the impression that they own the South China Sea, as far south as Brunei. That doesn't include a narrow line of water on the western shores of the Philippines, or a somewhat wider strip off the Vietnamese shore.

Most of the rest of the world - including the United States - recognize national economic boundaries as a strip of ocean 200 nautical miles wide. That boundary was set by the United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Maybe you heard that the running dog capitalist oppressors hadn't ratified UNCLOS. Ratified, no: recognize, yes.3

Vietnam seems to think it's okay to operate within its UNCLOS boundaries.

Which brings me to something I read this morning:
"Vietnam plans live-fire drill amid South China Sea row"
BBC News (June 10, 2011)

"Vietnam has said it will hold live-fire exercises in the South China Sea amid escalating tensions with China over disputed waters.

"Vietnam warned vessels to stay out of the area off its central coast when it conducts the drills on Monday.

"It follows a verbal clash with China over sovereignty in the area.

"China reacted angrily after Vietnam said a Chinese fishing boat rammed cables from an oil exploration vessel inside its exclusive economic zone.

"Beijing said Chinese fishing boats were chased away by armed Vietnamese ships in the incident on Thursday...."
From that point on, the BBC News piece gives detail about what may be a sort of 'he said/she said' snit on an international scale. China claims that one of their poor, helpless fishing boats was cruelly dragged for an hour by the uncaring Vietnamese. Not in quite those terms - but I gather that China's claiming to be the victim here.

They may be right.

Or, maybe not.

I don't know.

I'm no greater fan of Vietnam's current leadership, than I am of China's. Although Vietnam's bosses also seem to have realized that their old-school economic policies simply weren't working.4 And that's another topic.

Vietnam and China in a Snit: So What?

The South China Sea isn't quite as far away from Minnesota as you can get from Minnesota, and still be on Earth - but it's close. In the 'good old days,' I might never have heard of the altercation between Vietnam and China.

This isn't the 'good old days.' And even then it might have made a difference to folks here in central North America. Particularly if the folks running China and Vietnam decide to let what happened grow into a shooting war.

I don't know how likely an armed confrontation is - but I am pretty sure that China's leadership has decided to get China back to the top of the heap in world affairs.

I don't have a problem with China returning to the prosperity and cultural achievements of its past - with upgrades. From my point of view, that means more markets for American producers - and maybe more tourists in Minnesota's lake country.

What I am concerned about is the possibility that China's leaders may not quite realize what century they're at - and that quite a few folks now think it's impolite to march an army into somebody else's territory and say that you've 'liberated' it.

There are some who think getting a little empire to call your own is still okay, of course. And that's yet another topic.5

Related posts:
In the news:
1 "China," CIA World Factbook (last updated May 26, 2011)

2 I've discussed what China seems to believe, before:
3 "United States non-ratification of the UNCLOS," Wikipedia (last modified 24 May 2011)

Note:
"...Although the United States now recognizes the UNCLOS as a codification of customary international law, it has not yet ratified it...."
(United States non-ratification of the UNCLOS," Wikipedia) [emphasis mine]
4 "Vietnam," CIA World Factbook (last updated June 7, 2011)

5 Yankee imperialism, real or imagined, still seems to be anathema in American academia. There seems to be a little sympathy for the 'right sort' wanting little empires to call their own, though:
Maps:

Pacific Ocean

(Pacific, CIA World Factbook, used w/o permission)

South China Sea, disputed boundaries

(BBC News, UNCLOS, CIA, used w/o permission)

China

(China, CIA World Factbook, used w/o permission)

I added the approximate South China Sea UNCLOS boundary to the CIA World Factbook map.

United States - UNCLOS

(United States, CIA World Factbook, used w/o permission)

For comparison, I added the approximate UNCLOS boundary to this map of the United States. America is in the happy position of having two of the planet's largest oceans on its two major coasts. The east and west coasts both face other nations: but they're thousands of miles away.

United States - Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) boundary

(ary 05, 2010 - Arguments About the Arctic Heat Up As the Ice Melts, UC Santa Barbara Geography / News & Events / Department News, used w/o permission)

This map is an illustration of another sort of politico-economic boundary involving the United States. It's part of a standard-issue piece on the 'global warming gonna kill us all' theme - but I think the map is a useful illustration for comparing American boundary issues and China's.

Additional background:
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Wednesday, June 8, 2011

Delta Air Lines, American Soldiers, and a Baggage SNAFU

My guess is that most folks boarding an airliner don't have an assault rifle, a grenade launcher and a 9-mm. pistol in their carry-on luggage.

But then, most folks boarding an airliner aren't returning from duty in Afghanistan.

It looks like Delta Air Lines took hundreds of dollars from individual soldiers in exchange for letting them carry their luggage into the plane. Or, rather, tried to take.

American soldiers apparently don't usually carry that sort of cash with them - my guess is that somebody in the unit worked out a deal to keep the airline happy and still get everybody home.

On their way back, two soldiers made a short video, and posted it on YouTube. That's it, on your right, reduced to fit this blog's format.I think it's worth listening to. So did quite a few other folks, it seems. By the time I was done with the three-minute interview, 204,583 folks had viewed it.

Not the Best Publicity for Delta

About the best explanation for this mess may be that there was a massive lack of communication, somewhere.

Delta has acknowledged that the incident happened, explained their position: and it looks like the soldiers may eventually get reimbursed for the money they lost. That's nice.

On the other hand, I gather that quite a few families with wage-earners in the military are very much not in the caviar-and-champagne economic bracket. A few hundred dollars gone missing from their budget is not trivial. Even if they'll get the money back. Eventually. Probably.

Botched Communication? Bad Attitude? No Idea

Right now, I don't know why American soldiers had to give money they didn't have - as individuals - in order to get home with their equipment.

There are quite a few possible explanations, including:
  • Poor communication
    • Delta not telling the unit what to expect
    • Someone in the unit not passing the information along
    • Something else
  • Bad attitude - maybe
    • Someone in the outfit offended a clerk
      • Who decided to be inflexible with Delta's rules
    • Someone in Delta
      • Decided to punish the soldiers for being soldiers
      • Was in a snit
      • Assumed that 'all Americans are rich'
        • So they'll never notice the loss
Or maybe something else happened. I really don't know.

American Armed Forces: Imperfect, But Who Isn't?

Finally, I don't think that America's armed forces can do no wrong. I don't think they can do no right, either.

I do know that I'm profoundly glad that there are people with brains and character it takes to be a soldier - who are willing to defend this country. I've posted about that before:Slightly-related posts:News and views:
1 Excerpt from the news:
"Two U.S. soldiers returning home from deployment in Afghanistan said Delta Air Lines charged their unit hundreds of dollars in extra baggage fees – money that many of the soldiers did not have.Staff Sgts. Fred Hilliker and Robert O'Hair filmed a video onboard Flight 1625 and posted it on YouTube.

"They criticized Delta for the additional charges, complaining that the 34 soldiers were charged as much as $2,800 in baggage fees.

" 'We were frustrated with the situation,' O'Hair told Fox News Radio. “Honestly, we were just trying to get home.' O'Hair said the trouble started Tuesday during an 18-hour layover in Baltimore.

"His unit was heading back to Fort Polk, La., after a deployment in Afghanistan. O'Hair said their military orders stated that each soldier was allowed to check up to four bags free of charge. But the Delta agent told the soldiers they would have to pay for the fourth bag.

" 'My extra bag was my weapons case,' he said. 'I had my assault rifle, a grenade launcher and a 9-mm. pistol.'

"According to Delta's website, military personnel flying in coach on travel orders are allowed to only check three bags free of charge...."
(FoxNews.com)
Posted by at 2 comments:
Labels: , ,

Monday, June 6, 2011

France and Online Social Media: Dealing With E-Mail and Other Threats

I live in central Minnesota, and love it here. I'm rather pleased that the pontoon boat was invented by a Minnesota farmer. (Apathetic Lemming of the North (October 15, 2007)

I have, however, long since resigned myself to the fact that the world does not revolve around Minnesota.

Then there are the folks who run France.

I am Not Making This Up

"French TV, radio programs slapped with social media restriction"
Catherine Clifford and Saskya Vandoorne, CNN (June 6, 2011)

"A decree from the early 1990s, reimplemented by French regulators, is putting an end to French television and radio announcers naming social networking sites on air except for news purposes.

"The decree banned 'clandestine advertising': the promotion of a brand outside the boundaries of recognized publicity avenues.

"The reimplementation of the ruling by France's Superior Audiovisual Council means that French programs will no longer be able to urge their viewers or listeners to follow them on specific sites, such as Twitter, as has become the norm in worldwide broadcasting.

"The controversy began when an unnamed French TV channel approached the council to ask whether, under this decree, they had the right to direct viewers to social sites.

"Christine Kelly, spokeswoman for the council explained: 'Facebook and Twitter are commercial brands like Coca-Cola or L'Oreal or any other. There are many social networking sites on many topics -- cooking, animals -- why should we mention one and not others?'

"From now on news anchors will be able to give only vague instructions as to where to find information online, such as 'follow us on social networking sites.'

"French bloggers have been up in arms on Twitter and some have even composed tongue-in-cheek ways to get round the ban. One suggested: 'find live coverage of the trial on our thread on the platform which spreads messages of 140 characters'

"French commentators have been speculating on the real roots of this regulation. Matthew Fraser, a social networking expert and author of 'Throwing Sheep in the Boardroom,' a book looking at the online social media revolution, believes the ban could be a sign of defiance against Anglo-Saxon cultural domination.

" 'In my mind,' he said, 'if it had been a French social networking site then nobody would have wanted it to be regulated, but because these sites symbolize the United States, regulation is there.'

"This is not the first time anglicized, Internet-related vocabulary has been banned in France. In 2003 the use of the word 'e-mail' was forbidden in all government literature. This was due to the Toubon law, which tries to protect the purity of the French language from anglicized words and phrases.

"This time, however, the Superior Audiovisual Council insists that the ban is in no way linked to language purity...."
(CNN) [emphasis mine]
I like freedom of speech. I'm not at all comfortable when a government wants to control what people say.

And I think that when a country's leaders think they must force citizens to maintain the country's language and culture - it's a sad situation.

Related posts:
In the news:
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

China to Google: 'Shut Up Or We'll Hurt You'

Why would anybody want to do business with China?

For the same reason that applies anywhere else: to make a profit. China is a huge country: in terms of geography, population, and now economics.1

Huge Market, Huge Problems

I think a publicly-owned international company might have trouble explaining to its stockholders why it wasn't trying to get a piece of the Chinese market for whatever goods or services it offered.

On the other hand, doing business in China means deciding to put up with the sort of interest the country's leaders take in what their subjects say, do, and think. Or deciding that enough is enough, and pulling out.

If it's so bad, why don't we hear more about the Party's zeal for control and conformity?

I think Google's experience shows why so many international firms stay politely silent:
"Google has become a 'political tool' vilifying the Chinese government, an official Beijing newspaper said on Monday, warning that the U.S. Internet giant's statements about hacking attacks traced to China could hurt its business....

"...Last week, Google said it had broken up an effort to steal the passwords of hundreds of Google email account holders, including U.S. government officials, Chinese human rights advocates and journalists. It said the attacks appeared to come from China....

"...By saying that Chinese human rights activists were among the targets of the hacking, Google was 'deliberately pandering to negative Western perceptions of China, and strongly hinting that the hacking attacks were the work of the Chinese government,' the People's Daily overseas edition, a small offshoot of the main domestic paper, said in a front-page commentary....

"...'Google should not become overly embroiled in international political struggle, playing the role of a tool for political contention," the paper added.

" 'For when the international winds shift direction, it may become sacrificed to politics and will be spurned by the marketplace,' it said, without specifying how Google's business could be hurt....

"...In February, overseas Chinese websites, inspired by anti-authoritarian uprisings across the Arab world, called for protests across China, raising Beijing's alarm about dissent and prompting tightened censorship of the Internet.

"China already blocks major foreign social websites such as Facebook and Twitter."
(Reuters)

Related posts:
In the news:
1 China's gross domestic product, per person, is about $7,600 - not quite on a par with America's $47,200, or Saudi Arabia's $24,200, but well beyond Nicaragua's $3,000 per capita GDP. And China's per capita GDP is growing. 1 It isn't the economic disaster area of the Cold War world.
"Since the late 1970s China has moved from a closed, centrally planned system to a more market-oriented one that plays a major global role - in 2010 China became the world's largest exporter...."
(China, CIA World Factbook)
I think that's all good news. I want China to be wealthy, and for individuals in China to have large disposable incomes. I'll admit to having slightly selfish motives.

International trade existed before there were nations, which lets archaeologists study the economics of ancient cultures - and that's another topic. We're more obviously connected to each other now, I think - and "global economy" is more than a nifty phrase for politicos and journalists.

The way I see it, rich people can buy more stuff than poor people - and are more likely to have money they're willing to lend to entrepreneurs. China is a huge market today. If folks living there were as wealthy as your average Saudi citizen or American, some might decide to come to Minnesota for fishing or winter sports: which would help the economy here.

Sources: CIA World Factbook, China (updated on May 26, 2011), Nicaragua (updated on May 26, 2011), Saudi Arabia (updated on May 26, 2011), United States (updated May 26, 2011).
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Saturday, June 4, 2011

Gmail, China, Knee-Jerk Response, and the Information Age

I ran into a news item last night. The focus was on U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates, his Chinese counterpart General Liang Guanglie, and what Gates said about China-United States relations. The two men were at an Asia-Pacific annual security conference ("talkfest" is how the article put it): called the Shangri-La Dialogue, of all things.

The latest hack attack coming from servers in China came up, briefly.

Hackers and Imperialist Capitalist Aggressor Warmonger Running Dogs

Times change. I haven't heard diplomatic boilerplate like "capitalist aggressor" for quite a while. Being away from college probably helps, but I think many folks have realized that it's not the 19th century any more, and class struggle just isn't what it used to be. And that's another topic.

Some things haven't changed so much, though.

First, about the latest hack attack:
"There is a lot of talk--and diplomatic tension--this week related to reports that attacks originating from China have breached Google Gmail accounts, including those of senior US government officials. The focus is on e-mail, and whether or not e-mail accounts were hacked, but a breached Gmail account is a much bigger prize than just the e-mail account it is attached to.

"Google claims that the spear phishing attacks that targeted Gmail accounts of White House staff, and successfully exposed accounts of senior US government officials, high-ranking military personnel, and political activists, originated from China. China denies any state-sponsored involvement in the attacks, and the FBI is investigating...."
(PCWorld Business Center)1
I think it's possible that Google and China's leaders are right. I think it's very likely that Google traced the hack attack to servers in China: although I'll admit that Google could, in principle, be faking the attack's source. I don't think that's likely, but is is possible.

As for China's response to news that their servers hosted a hack attack? Again?

According to China's military, it is the work of Yankee imperialists. That's not quite the way they put it, but that's the basic idea:
"...A new irritant was introduced this week, with allegations that computer hackers in China had compromised the personal Gmail accounts of several hundred people, including U.S. government officials, military personnel and political activists.

"The Chinese military tried to direct the spotlight off those allegations Friday, with accusations that the U.S. is launching a global 'Internet war' to bring down Arab and other governments.

"The FBI said it was investigating Google's allegations, but no official government email accounts have been compromised. Google said all the hacking victims have been notified and their accounts have been secured.....
(Associated Press, via Foxnews.com2) [emphasis mine]
Again, China's line seems to be that "the U.S. is launching a global 'Internet war' to bring down Arab and other governments."

That's probably good enough for folks who believe that the CIA blew up New York City's World Trade Center. After all these decades, though, it sounds like the same tired old 'American aggressor warmonger' stuff that cluttered the news in my youth.

A Country's Servers aren't a Country's Government

Since China is one of the world's more tightly-managed countries, in my opinion, I find it a little hard to believe that hackers have just happened to use Chinese servers for hack attacks - for years - and that the country's leadership doesn't know it's happening and can't stop it anyway.

Still, it's possible.

Particularly since I can easily imagine that it's in China's interests to get access to networks in other countries, for either espionage or sabotage, and blame Yankee imperialism.

China's response may simply be knee-jerk xenophobia: the sort of thing that had right-wing loonies blaming whatever they didn't like on the commies, back in 'the good old days.' I remember the real "Happy Days," by the way - and don't, ever, want to go back.

Or, the folks running China may not be the ones who planned and executed all those hack attacks. China's leaders may be aware that the attacks come from servers in their country - and not be able to stop whoever's behind the hacking. If that's the case, they may simply be embarrassed: and desperately want the problem to belong to someone else.

I think it's a good idea to remember that a national government doesn't necessarily control everything that happens within its borders: no matter how much the leaders want to.

Real Threat, Proportional Response

It's entirely possible that no one person or organization is behind attacks on the World Bank, Gmail, Sony, and all the rest. I think it's quite possible that there is no one motive behind the hacking.

My understanding is that there's a hot - if unethical and illegal - market for the sort of data that has quite possibly been stolen. That would make the hacks a new version of burglary. And, most likely, a private-sector effort.

Governments have their own motives.

What's happened in Tunisia, Egypt, Bahrain, Syria, Libya, and elsewhere shows what can happen when old-school leaders lose control of their subjects. My guess is that Iran's rulers are developing a 'just us' intranet to keep the 'Arab spring' from spreading east. The Ayatollahs have nice-sounding motives: they want to 'protect' Iranians from foreign influences.

In my opinion, Iran's leadership isn't the only outfit that's scared of the Information Age. And for good reason. I've gone over that before:I think it's likely that some folks have idealistic reasons for hacking into corporate and government networks. Sometimes I even sympathize - a little - with the ideas they support. Like freedom of information. Which is emphatically not the same as thinking that what they're actually doing is right.

In a way, it's a sort of 'with friends like these, who needs enemies?' situation. A case in point:
"A hacker group has claimed responsibility for defacing the PBS.org website, the Fox.com site, and the Sony network, posting images of defaced websites and stolen databases and emails to its website....

"...Pike linked the hacker group Lulz to Anonymous, the 'hacktivist' collective that -- in the name of the freedom of information -- has hacked numerous websites, wrestled with security firms and made public a decrypted version of the cyberworm that crippled Iran's nuclear power program...."
(Jeremy A. Kaplan, FoxNews.com (June 2, 2011))
According to the article, Pike's considering turning himself in, before law enforcement shows up with a warrant. That's a good idea, in my opinion. Blaming Yankee imperialism may still work as an excuse in diplomacy: but American law enforcement is, in my experience, more interested in facts than finger-pointing.

As I said before, I think it's possible that a server in China could have been used for hack attacks, without the Chinese government being involved.

Determining how likely that is - and whether that's what's actually been happening - is a job I'm profoundly grateful belongs to someone else.

If it turns out that the Beijing bosses are responsible for the hack attacks, I suspect and hope that America's leaders will try to sort the mess out diplomatically. Not because I think the folks who are still occupying Tibet are a bunch of really nice guys who are just misunderstood. It's a matter of proportional response, and how many folks who weren't responsible could get hurt or killed in a military operation.

If the North American power grid goes down this winter? That's something else. (June 1, 2011)

China, Assumptions, and Living in the Information Age

I've been criticized for not having the proper attitude toward China: and not being politely silent.3 It's a familiar reaction. Commie-hunters acted that way in the McCarthy era (January 9, 2010); professors did the same, a few decades later; and I'm don't think trying to impose ideological purity is a good idea - no matter whose ideas are being shoved down my throat.

I also think it's a bad idea to assume that 'foreigners,' 'commies,' 'the military-industrial complex,' 'Big cheese,' or any other standard-issue bad guys are 'really behind' any particular issue. (January 14, 2009)

Finally, I think that these are trying times for old-school autocrats: and anybody who had a privileged position before information technology made it possible for folks to share ideas - without permission from their 'betters.'

I like the comparatively open marketplace of ideas we have today: but then, I don't mind people having access to dangerous technology. Like LP gas, guns, or computers. (June 27, 2008)

Related posts:
News and views:
1 Excerpt from news and views:
"Putting a positive spin on a sometimes stormy relationship, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Friday that military ties with China are 'on a more positive trajectory' but need further strengthening....

"...The main elements of friction remain, however. China still claims control of waters the U.S. considers international. Chinese ambition for influence in Southeast Asia and elsewhere still makes smaller nations uneasy, while Beijing dislikes the heavy U.S. naval presence in Asian waters and builds up its military with weaponry only logically intended for use against the U.S.

"A new irritant was introduced this week, with allegations that computer hackers in China had compromised the personal Gmail accounts of several hundred people, including U.S. government officials, military personnel and political activists.

"The Chinese military tried to direct the spotlight off those allegations Friday, with accusations that the U.S. is launching a global 'Internet war' to bring down Arab and other governments.

"The FBI said it was investigating Google's allegations, but no official government email accounts have been compromised. Google said all the hacking victims have been notified and their accounts have been secured.....

"...Gates and Liang met on the sidelines of the Shangri-La Dialogue, an annual security talkfest attended by defense officials from across the Asia-Pacific region. On Saturday Gates was delivering an address to the conference before continuing an around-the-world journey that is his final trip before retiring June 30...."
(Associated Press via FoxNews.com)
1Excerpts from news and views:
"There is a lot of talk--and diplomatic tension--this week related to reports that attacks originating from China have breached Google Gmail accounts, including those of senior US government officials. The focus is on e-mail, and whether or not e-mail accounts were hacked, but a breached Gmail account is a much bigger prize than just the e-mail account it is attached to.

"Google claims that the spear phishing attacks that targeted Gmail accounts of White House staff, and successfully exposed accounts of senior US government officials, high-ranking military personnel, and political activists, originated from China. China denies any state-sponsored involvement in the attacks, and the FBI is investigating.

"The Gmail e-mail accounts are getting all of the attention. Catalin Cosoi, head of the BitDefender Online Threats Lab, notes in a blog post, 'Just as in the previous attack against the Gmail service, we can assume that cyber-criminals went after sensitive documents the users might have inadvertently forwarded from their business inboxes.'

"But, it would be more accurate to say that Google accounts are being targeted or compromised--not just Gmail. Depending on the extent the hacked account relies on Google, there is potentially much more at stake than just the documents that might be forwarded as a file attachments from Gmail. There is no differentiation between hacking a Gmail account, and hacking the rest of the diverse array of Google services....

"...If the victim actually uses Google Docs, the attacker will have access to all documents, spreadsheets, presentations, forms, and drawings stored online by the victim--not just the ones that might have been included as a file attachment in an e-mail.

"Accessing Google Maps could yield valuable information as well. Most users enter a home address as the default location to save time when searching for driving directions....

"...It is up to Google, and China, and the FBI to get to the bottom of whether the compromised accounts are a state-sponsored act of international espionage, or just the work of run-of-the-mill spear phishing cyber-criminals. But, regardless of who is behind the attack, or what the underlying motives are, there is more than just e-mail at stake."
(PCWorld Business Center)
2 Excerpt from news and views:
"Putting a positive spin on a sometimes stormy relationship, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Friday that military ties with China are 'on a more positive trajectory' but need further strengthening....

"...The main elements of friction remain, however. China still claims control of waters the U.S. considers international. Chinese ambition for influence in Southeast Asia and elsewhere still makes smaller nations uneasy, while Beijing dislikes the heavy U.S. naval presence in Asian waters and builds up its military with weaponry only logically intended for use against the U.S.

"A new irritant was introduced this week, with allegations that computer hackers in China had compromised the personal Gmail accounts of several hundred people, including U.S. government officials, military personnel and political activists.

"The Chinese military tried to direct the spotlight off those allegations Friday, with accusations that the U.S. is launching a global 'Internet war' to bring down Arab and other governments.

"The FBI said it was investigating Google's allegations, but no official government email accounts have been compromised. Google said all the hacking victims have been notified and their accounts have been secured.....

"...Gates and Liang met on the sidelines of the Shangri-La Dialogue, an annual security talkfest attended by defense officials from across the Asia-Pacific region. On Saturday Gates was delivering an address to the conference before continuing an around-the-world journey that is his final trip before retiring June 30...."
(Associated Press via FoxNews.com)
3 Comments from "Tibet: Fifty Years of Chinese Liberation, and Counting" (March 10, 2009):
"Anonymous said...

"If you are outside of Tibet, just leave Tibet alone, let Tibetan live by themselves, please love your land where you live and shut up. If Dalai was right, a pig could fly.
"March 10, 2009 3:45 PM

"Brian, aka Nanoc, aka Norski said...

"Anonymous,

"If 'Tibetan live by themselves' I might. However, since Tibet was invaded about fifty years ago, and Chinese troops are now stationed to keep the Han shopkeepers safe and Tibetans in line, and quite a number of Tibetans don't like the situation: I will not 'shut up.'

"Kudos, though, at being comparatively civil about it. Particularly in comparison with what may have been another of the throng of Anonymouses out there, responding to 'Today's Main Event: Protesters vs. the Olympic Torch in San Francisco' (April 9, 2008).

"That Anonymous's comment, in full:
"Anonymous said...

"Don't pretend that you know a lot about history. Tibet is still a An English TRANSLATION name as same as Xizang. Now that you don't like China, you can call Xiazang any name you want.
"Suggest you goto a library to read a little more about Tibet then comment on this "Independence", though suggesting going to library is often a mother's duty.
"April 26, 2008 7:54 PM
"March 10, 2009 6:05 PM
"Politics and the Future said...

"China is not my focus in the war on terror only in my economic studies is it a bigger focus for me.

"But I do have to say one thing, with a growing nation could China become a new superpower? could they develop weapons of mass destruction? I know I know I sound like a conspiratist but I'm not. I am only asking.
"I believe they are going to gain more power both militarily and economically.

"March 10, 2009 6:59 PM

"Anonymous said...

"Please pay more attention to your own business. Never lavish your sympathy on Dalai. If you turn blind eyes to the truth and still whitewash a serf owner as your spiritual leader, I would say nothing any more. What do you think if you know those old noble owner picked serfs' eyes and striped their skin for punishment ? They asked serf to take their shit as medicine. How do you feel about it? These only happened several decades ago under Dalai's rule in Tibet. Where is your conscience. How could you depict it as a shangrila? Please look back to the documentary which your western media took before 1990's. If you think you are god and don't need to read, I go.

"March 10, 2009 8:04 PM

"Brian, aka Nanoc, aka Norski said...

"Anonymous #2, or maybe the same Anonymous,

I know that Tibet isn't Shangri-La (Lost Horizon is a pretty good movie, though - so is Star Wars). Live [!] isn't the movies.

"I do, though, seem to have hit a nerve.

"Apparently, one is not supposed to discuss, or mention, the liberation of Tibet - except in glowing terms.

"Anybody interested in the Chinese side of this issue could do a lot worse than reading that op-ed I linked to.

"This isn't just about the Dalai Lama, by the way: the new overlords of Tibet may not be that big an improvement over the monks they displaced.
"March 10, 2009 8:11 PM

"Brian, aka Nanoc, aka Norski said...

"Politics and the Future,

"I think I followed that comment.

"China's nuclear weapons program began, as far as can be determined, in the mid-1950s. At this time, they almost certainly have hundreds, but not thousands, of nuclear bombs in their stockpile. Chinese leaders have repeatedly pledged to not use nuclear weapons first in a confrontation. ("Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) - Nuclear Weapons" GlobalSecurity.org)

"I'm inclined to believe Chinese leaders on this point. After the debacle we call the Cultural Revolution, Chinese leadership has shown few to no suicidal tendencies.

"(North Korea with nukes is a whole different ball of wax.)

"Not that I have unwavering confidence in the good will of the Chinese government.

"For those looking for something to be concerned about, there's China's secret submarine base (no kidding): "Forget the Olympics For Now: China's Secret Submarine Base is Serious" (May 2, 2008)
"March 12, 2009 12:48 PM"
(Comments from "Tibet: Fifty Years of Chinese Liberation, and Counting" (March 10, 2009))
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, June 1, 2011

L-3 Communications, Grumman: Hack Attack

I'd like to think that most folks running major technology companies in America are a trifle less clueless than Dilbert's manager:



Unhappily, it doesn't take a pointy-haired manager, or executives who think "password1" is a strong password, to have security troubles.

A system like this sounds fairly safe, I think:
"...SecurID adds an extra layer of protection to a login process by requiring users to enter a secret code number displayed on a keyfob, or in software, in addition to their password. The number is cryptographically generated and changes every 30 seconds...."
(Wired)
The SecurID service probably worked pretty well. Until someone hacked into their system. We still don't know exactly what data was stolen, and how it's been used, but whats been happening to American defense contractors suggests that the encryption seeds for SecurID tokens is available to someone with Internet access.

And an interest in classified data about United States weapons systems.

This is not, in my considered opinion, good news. At all.

I've put excerpts from the last two days' news at the end of this post.1

There's probably going to be quite a bit of finger-pointing, as word of this these hack attacks spreads. One of the more sensible points to look into, I think, is why more clients of SecurID didn't change their systems after the original hack?!

Oh, Come On: How Bad Could It Be?

Someone speculated that the control system for Predator drones might be hacked with data that's quite possibly been taken from someone's network. About the best outcome of that might be that the drones wouldn't work at all. Someone with a little piloting skill and the right software might decide to hijack a Predator drone and send it on a new mission.

That, I think, would be bad news. But then, I'm one of those people who don't think that the military-industrial complex and Yankee imperialism is the greatest threat to world peace and spotted owls.

Looking beyond strictly military data, America - and a fair number of other countries - depends on a complex power grid and a telecommunications system for most of what we do every day. Which, for quite a few months each year here in Minnesota, includes keeping the temperature inside above freezing.

Back when the Y2K bug was being dealt with, I evaluated my household's resources. Happily, we didn't get a chance to test this: but I'm pretty sure we would have been okay for at least a few weeks, if the power had failed at midnight, December 31, 1999.2

Then there are nightmare scenarios, like someone getting clever with a pharmacy chain's prescription software. Think Colossus: The Forbin Project meets Dr. Giggles.

Maybe the power grid and phone system crashing in mid-winter wouldn't be so bad, after all.

Related posts:
In the news:
1 Excerpts from the news:
"Top military contractor Northrop Grumman Corp. may have been hit by a cyber assault, the latest in a string of alarming attacks against military suppliers...."

"...Lockheed Martin said its network had been compromised last week, and defense contractor L-3 Communications was targeted recently, as well. Both intrusions involved the use of remote-access security tokens, experts say.

"On May 26, Northrop Grumman shut down remote access to its network without warning -- catching even senior managers by surprise and leading to speculation that a similar breach had occurred...."

"...Charles Dodd, an information warfare consultant with Nisrad Cyber Research Institute, raised a scary possibility: Unmanned aerial vehicles such as the Predator can be controlled by computers. If hackers access those computers, can they operate those deadly drones?

" 'If adversaries get that technology, we may not be the one that controls those weapons,' he told Fox News.

"The network attacks spiral from a security breach in March, when hackers stole information related to RSA's SecurID access keys...."
(FoxNews.com)
"An executive at defense giant L-3 Communications warned employees last month that hackers were targeting the company using inside information on the SecurID keyfob system freshly stolen from an acknowledged breach at RSA Security.

"The L-3 attack makes the company the second hacker target linked to the RSA breach - both defense contractors. Reuters reported Friday that Lockheed Martin had suffered an intrusion.

" 'L-3 Communications has been actively targeted with penetration attacks leveraging the compromised information,' read an April 6 e-mail from an executive at L-3's Stratus Group to the group's 5,000 workers, one of whom shared the contents with Wired.com on condition of anonymity...."

"...Together, the attacks suggest the RSA intruders obtained crucial information - possibly the encryption seeds for SecurID tokens - that they're using in targeted intelligence-gathering missions against sensitive U.S. targets....

"...SecurID adds an extra layer of protection to a login process by requiring users to enter a secret code number displayed on a keyfob, or in software, in addition to their password. The number is cryptographically generated and changes every 30 seconds...."
(Wired)
2 No 'survivalist' stuff: the water heater holds a pretty good supply of water, and the basement could be sealed off. It would have been cold and dark, though.
Posted by at 2 comments:
Labels: , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Unique, innovative candles


Visit us online:
Spiral Light Candle  • Find a Retailer
• Spiral Light Candle Store

Blogroll

Note! Although I believe that these websites and blogs are useful resources for understanding the War on Terror, I do not necessarily agree with their opinions. 1 1 Given a recent misunderstanding of the phrase "useful resources," a clarification: I do not limit my reading to resources which support my views, or even to those which appear to be accurate. Reading opinions contrary to what I believed has been very useful at times: sometimes verifying my previous assumptions, sometimes encouraging me to change them.

Even resources which, in my opinion, are simply inaccurate are sometimes useful: these can give valuable insights into why some people or groups believe what they do.

In short, It is my opinion that some of the resources in this blogroll are neither accurate, nor unbiased. I do, however, believe that they are useful in understanding the War on Terror, the many versions of Islam, terrorism, and related topics.